Originally Posted by Jeffrey (Post 868555)

BTW, I'm really not biased. I'm just particular against puffed up arguments. I am undecided on this subject. I know, weird place to be. I definitely believe a woman can preach, it's teaching men that is the problem (which implies pastoring). However, I enjoy hearing the evidence... and evidence that's painstakingly prepared.

Originally Posted by rdp (Post 868755)

"20 new posts"???????????????????? Wow, talk about exaggeratted attacks!! And this is relevant to the topic...........H-O-W???????? Weird stuff!

The rest is not even worthy of comment, since YOU are the one who perpetrates as the great exegete, always clothed in rags of humility, of course.

Originally Posted by rdp (Post 868759)

Introducing a "synagogue" theory into the text, which has absolutely NOTHING to do w/ the subject of I Tim. 2:11-15, & is totally unsupported from the actual text itself. Then, you pat him on the back saying "good job"????? I'd say you need to get your money back on your "hermeneutics" courses, or reread the books!

Originally Posted by rdp (Post 868763)

Honestly, I cannot for the life of me understand how in the world someone can make a statement like "I definitely believe that a woman can preach." And then look at God-breathed passages like "I do not allow a woman to teach, or to excercise authority over a man. She is to remain quiet."

Seriously Jeffrey, how in the world can you not uderstand "I do not allow....."?
The terms "teach" & "preach" are used synonymously in the Bible, just get your concordance & see how they're used. You know, maybe I should send you a copy of my book on this matter. I was very meticulous in the book. Just a thought.

Not to even mention I Cor 14:34................

Originally Posted by Praxeas (Post 868557)

I posted the way you did to mine. If you want to make it easier here is how we do it. Wrap quotes around each part you want to respond to, then OUTSIDE the quotes put your response. Then when it's my turn to response I just quote you and then do the same.

Not very computer literate, so bare w/ me in my folly.

Im basing my argument on what the text says. In order to UNDERSTAND what the text is saying it's important to understand to who and what Paul is speaking of and why. Nor is it unprovable. It's a matter of history and scripture. Scriptures tell us it was the MEN that learned the word of God. They were.

Well here is what the text says [written to a young apostle regarding church order]: "But I do not allow a woman to teach, or to excercise authority over a man. She must remain quiet." Where does "the text say" anything about "synagogues":__________? Then why did you introduce it into the subject matter. Paul was addressing church order, which you're trying desperately to render ineffective, as if we now have a different set of rules for the church?????



I gave the only definition of making an argument from silence, which i was not doing.

Then pls. show where the text refers, or even hints at "synagogues":________? Before you scream, "I never said that," then why did you import it into the topic at hand?????? And how does that render the plain language of I Tim. 2:11-15 unapplicable?


No I argued the scriptures. I exegized them to show what they grammatically say and pointed out the text does NOT say she an not pastor. I pointed out it says she is not to have authority over a MAN, not a church or a congregation or both men and women.

Wow Prax! So giving a word definition is now "exegeting"????? Come, come now! Besides, does this mean that she can only "preach" to women [which is entirely in line w/ the Bible, tks. for the assisstance!]?



Since I never said this text was about synagogues, this is a pointless.

You imported synagogues into the subject matter. I mean did I just imagine this???




As explained before it's helpful to understand and interpret scriptures to understand who and what and why the author is writing. The church he is writing to. The church is a judaeo Christian church. Many of his readers are Jews. The first early Jewish converts still met in synagogues. Acts 26:11. So when they left they were coming from that sort of set up.

Precisely, & he was addressing church order....are we still in the church Prax? Or do we now have a different set of rules?

Yes, many of his readers were jews, but this was addressed to Timothy! Besides, pls. show me the example of a Jewish woman who exposited from the Scriptures:_________. Or perhaps a female priest:_________? Man, you're really helping out here!


I don't understand what you mean here by this verse and how it applies, anyways the meaning is talking about lording it over someone. BDAG shows this is not the simple "authority of a pastor". It's speaking of someone trying to dominate

The word primarily means simply "authority," Prax, just as it's translated, by approximately 1000 linguists combining the more reputable translations....Hmmmmmm.

RWP:The word authenteō is now cleared up by Kretschmer (Glotta, 1912, pp. 289ff.) and by Moulton and Milligan’s Vocabulary. See also Nageli, Der Wortschatz des Apostels Paulus and Deissmann, Light, etc., pp. 88f. Autodikeō was the literary word for playing the master while authenteō was the vernacular term. It comes from auṫhentes, a self-doer, a master, autocrat. It occurs in the papyri (substantive authentēs, master, verb authenteō, to domineer, adjective authentikos, authoritative, "authentic"). Modern Greek has aphentes = Effendi = "Mark."


You said let's take a look at some cooroborative evidence...but you didn't offer any to look at.

Wow, I give several Biblical facts, & you respond w/ "Where's the evidence"???? I suppose biblical facts aren't considerd as "evidence," but your "synagogue" hypothesis, never stated in the text is????? Whatever fries your chicken! Think I'll stick w/ the Bible!

Teaching and preaching are not synoymous. Preaching means to proclaim. Teaching means to educate others on a subject.

Oh how wrong you are! Jesus was "preaching and teaching" the people. He entered into the synagogues & taught the people, tell me Prax, was Jesus a preacher? Just take a look at your concordance & see how the terms are interchangeably used....be honest now!

The term Elders being in the masculine is indeed an ad nauseum argument. As I said church is feminine. Believers is masculine...does that mean females can't be believers?

Perhaps it's used "ad nauseum," because it's a very worthy point recognized for centuries now! I've already addressed your "bride" angle, which is just plain silly. Of course the term "bride" is feminine, but both men & women are seen in the church. Now, I'll grant you the same luxury of showing us where a woman ever once fills the NT Eldership:________?


Where is the evidence against a woman preacher?

I Tim. 2:11-15, I Cor. 14:34, for starters. Where's the evidence FOR women preachers in the church:________?

Preacher is a harold of divine truth. Doesn't a prophet harold divine truth? There are women prophets in the NT right?

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear (Post 868703)

all they would have to do is study WHO took women out of leadership roles...RCC...

It sure was not Jesus or Paul...

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear (Post 868738)

Sister Dana..this might interest you...

Thus there is support for “authenteo” as meaning “to proclaim oneself the author or originator of something.” If we apply this meaning of “authenteo” to 1 Timothy 2:12, we would have “I do not allow a woman to teach nor to represent herself as the originator or source of man.” This then might be a prohibition against a woman teaching a mythology similar to that of the Gnostics in which Eve predated Adam and was his creator. Certain Gnostic myths also included the notion that Adam, who had been deluded, was liberated by the Gnosis of his more enlightened spouse. (Catherine Clark Kroeger, "The Meaning of 'Authenteo'", from "Women, Authority & The Bible" by Alvera Mickelsen, ed. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1986, pp. 229-232).

Originally Posted by Jeffrey (Post 868764)

You're so silly.

Originally Posted by Jeffrey (Post 868765)

I'd say you need to save up for one or two yourself!

Don't say it's "unsupported" then go on to say you reject it because it doesn't agree with you.

If NT churches were very much influenced and shaped by Judaism (the faith of most of the church leaders, Christ being the fulfillment of their law), I think it's a fair assertion that these traditions would still be in the church only a year or two later. It's not really a stretch.

Very good Jeff, then pls, demonstrate a Jewish woman expositior of the TANAKH:__________? This merely advances the plainess of I Tim. 2:11-15.

You must HATE exegetical commentaries, huh? Nothing but "assertions" of people interpreting passages in light of their historical context. Those silly buffoons!